Thursday, December 08, 2011

Jürgen Graf tells another lie

Through several "Revisionist" propaganda organs (the ones I know about are the "National Journal", the Adelaide Institute’s website and the "Inconvenient History" journal), Graf published a rabid pamphlet with the title "The moral and intellectual bankruptcy of a scholar: Dr. Christian Lindtner and Holocaust Revisionism", which is essentially a regurgitation of staple "Revisionist" rubbish such as has been debunked on this blog site.

In his response to Lindtner’s rebuttal, which is headed "A challenge to Dr. Christian Lindtner", and of which he kindly sent me a copy, Graf claims to have learned of said rebuttal when reading the aforementioned interview.

This is good news for HC insofar as it suggests that Graf is one of our regular readers. And we’re also not surprised, after all the beatings he has taken from HC bloggers, that Jürgen hates our guts, judging by his referring to us as "the four clowns Roberto Mühlenkamp, Nick Terry, Jonathan Harrison and Sergey Romanov".

No problem with that – after all Jürgen is obviously so full of frustration that he needs to let off some steam, and the folks who have thoroughly exposed his falsehoods and those of other "Revisionist" charlatans, especially his co-authors Carlo Mattogno and Thomas Kues, are obvious targets for the poor fellow's puerile name-calling.

However, at the end of his "challenge" rambling Jürgen makes another of his somewhat-less-than-honest claims, as he extends to Lindtner the "challenge" discussed in my blog A message from Jürgen Graf:

Let Lindtner prove these claims. I challenge him to write a detailled refutation of one of the three following revisionist books:1) J. Graf and C. Mattogno, „Majdanek Concentration Camp. A Historical and Technical study“, Chicago 2003.2) C. Mattogno and J. Graf, „Treblinka – Extermination Camp or Transit Camp?“, Chicago 2003.3) J. Graf, C. Mattogno and T. Kues, „Sobibor: Holocaust Propaganda and Reality“, Washington 2010.Incidentally, I presented the same challenge to the clown Roberto Mühlenkamp in last June. Predictably, Mühlenkamp threw the towel. But the august scholar Dr. Christian Lindtner can certainly do better. Surely it will be very easy for him to make mincemeat of a book written by people who propagate „chutzpah“ and „only have contempt for serious scholarship“!

Jürgen's claim that I "threw the towel" is so flagrantly at odds with my response to his "challenge" that I sent him an e-mail message, demanding that he remove this false claim from wherever he had published his response to Lindtner until the end of 06.12.2011 (GMT), or else I would make this lie public.

The deadline has long expired. I haven't yet come upon a publication of Jürgen's "challenge to Dr. Christian Lindtner", but I also didn't receive a reply from Jürgen stating that he would remove the falsehood in question before publishing said "challenge". So I hereby do as announced in my e-mail and publish the contents of the same as sent to Jürgen Graf on Monday, December 5, 2011 7:05 PM:

So, Jürgen, why do you send me this shit, instead of sending it to Dr. Lindtner?

Is it because of the self-projecting names you call me and my fellow HC bloggers?

Or is it because of the filthy little lie you produce on the last page (presumably among others I may discover when reading through your hysterical slobber, this one just caught my attention because it has my name in it)?

I mean this lie:

«Incidentally, I presented the same challenge to the clown Roberto Mühlenkamp in last June. Predictably, Mühlenkamp threw the towel.»

Whence did you get the idea that I "threw the towel", Jürgen?

Certainly not from my blog under [link], where I clearly told you that your challenge will be answered, as follows:

MGK have for the most part remained indecorously silent (to use a phrase coined by Mattogno) in the face of this extensive and devastating criticism, and this makes Graf's challenge to discuss one of the productions authored or co-authored by him look like a lame attempt to save face and bide for time. On top of this criticism, Graf will however get more than he asked for in his latest e-mail, and perhaps also sooner than he may have expected, because we didn’t wait for his challenge to start working on a comprehensive critique covering several screeds produced by one or more of the "Revisionist" coryphées.

As to publishing, I think I can speak for my fellow HC contributors when I say that we gladly accept Graf's offer to publish our upcoming work on his website – provided of course that it appears there as soon as he receives it (and not only whenever he and his companions have finished an answer thereto) and that we are free to also publish it wherever else we like. Needless to say, MGK's eventual answer will be treated by us in the same manner, and we expect this to also apply to our refutation of said answer.

As to whatever corresponds to Graf’s presumably extensive definition "foul or obscene language", he can rest assured that the place where the critique is meant to be published (besides HC and his own website) precludes the use of such language, which is supposed to make those oh-so-sensitive "Revisionist" souls cringe despite the obscenity of their hate speech (that hypocrisy is the source of some amusement among their opponents, actually).

As a final note, we don’t consider ourselves "dragon-slayers", because MGK don’t qualify as "dragons". While they are certainly the best that "Revisionism" has got to offer, that only makes them the one-eyed among the blind (to put it politely).

I said you'll get more than you asked for, Jürgen. You'll get a comprehensive critique not just of one book, but of more than one book. I don't remember having stated when that critique would be published, and I also don't remember having withdrawn the above-quoted announcement. So unless one is to assume that you're simply too dumb to understand what I wrote (which I don't think you are, though I sometimes have my doubts), you were again lying through your teeth when you claimed that I "threw the towel".

As I'm a nice guy, I'll give you until the end of tomorrow, 6.12.2011 (GMT) to remove this lie (and as we're at it, also the self-projecting "clown" invective) from wherever you have published it, and to send me a link to where I can confirm that you removed it, plus an apology.

Should you fail to do so, this message will be published on the HC blog, together with the offending parts of your challenge text, as further confirmation that Jürgen Graf is a liar.

It's up to you, my friend.

Roberto

Needless to say, if the publication of Jürgen's "challenge to Dr. Lindtner" should not contain the "threw the towel" falsehood, this will be duly pointed out.

Update

As Dr. Lindtner informed in a comment to this blog, Jürgen had his "challenge to Dr. Christian Lindtner" published here, and some further rabid ranting here.

He also sent me this pearl by e-mail:

Dear Muehlenkamp,

In June I challenged you to write a critique (or review, or refutation) of one of several revisionist books. I distinctly remember that I mentioned "Majdanek", "Treblinka" and "Sobibor". I do not remember if there was a fourth one; if there was, it might have been "Giant" or Mattogno's "Auschwitz. The case for sanity".

Pointing out a few real or alleged errors in a book is not a review or refutation. A review or refutation must discuss every important aspect of a book. In other words, you have not accepted my challenged and thrown in the towel (the formulation "throw the towel" I used in my article is incorrect, as Thomas Kues pointed out to me).

This does not surprise me. Having made a fool of yourself trying to prove that "Sonderlager" had a criminal meaning (such as your mate Nick Terry made a fool of himself trying to prove that Udo Walendy had falsified a report from a Polish newspaper), you will hardly be eager to suffer a new humiliation. But of course I may be wrong. After all, you might be a masochist who enjoys getting beaten up. In this case, send me your review, or critique, or refutation as soon as it is ready; I will then publish it on my website even before writing my reply.(If you chose to review Mattogno's "Auschwitz. The case for sanity" the response will evidently be written by Mattogno and not by me.)

I will not bother to respond to anything else you might write because my time is of value.

J. Graf

P. S. The word "clown" is neither indecent nor obscene, unlike a certain word you used in your mail and which once again shows your deplorably low intellectual and moral level.

I responded as follows:

Hi Jürgen,

Are you slow on the uptake, or what's your problem?

What part of the following was too hard for you to understand?

MGK have for the most part remained indecorously silent (to use a phrase coined by Mattogno) in the face of this extensive and devastating criticism, and this makes Graf's challenge to discuss one of the productions authored or co-authored by him look like a lame attempt to save face and bide for time. On top of this criticism, Graf will however get more than he asked for in his latest e-mail, and perhaps also sooner than he may have expected, because we didn’t wait for his challenge to start working on a comprehensive critique covering several screeds produced by one or more of the "Revisionist" coryphées.

As to publishing, I think I can speak for my fellow HC contributors when I say that we gladly accept Graf's offer to publish our upcoming work on his website – provided of course that it appears there as soon as he receives it (and not only whenever he and his companions have finished an answer thereto) and that we are free to also publish it wherever else we like. Needless to say, MGK's eventual answer will be treated by us in the same manner, and we expect this to also apply to our refutation of said answer.

As to whatever corresponds to Graf’s presumably extensive definition "foul or obscene language", he can rest assured that the place where the critique is meant to be published (besides HC and his own website) precludes the use of such language, which is supposed to make those oh-so-sensitive "Revisionist" souls cringe despite the obscenity of their hate speech (that hypocrisy is the source of some amusement among their opponents, actually).

Claiming that I didn't accept your "challenge", when I told you that you would get a critique covering not one but several screeds produced by you and your associates (including two of the four oversized pamphlets you offered for review, by the way), is lousy chutzpah even for Jürgen Graf.

And that comes on top of your hiding behind your screeds instead of addressing the criticism that HC has sent your way since 2006, which is a poor show of yours already.

As to your babbling about my "Sonderlager" discussion with your schwedische Forscher friend, wishful thinking seems to be kind of thinking you excel at. In the four blogs listed below:

I refuted all of your friend's arguments, whereas he dodged most of mine. His reponse to the last of these blogs was deafening silence, unless I missed something. You may try to delude yourself as much as you want with your pathetic victory dances, but you shouldn't expect to look anything other than ridiculous on account of them.

Last but not least, I'm amused at your sermon about my having referred to your "challenge" by a vulgar term for "manure", which like the more educated term describes the same very appropriately. A promoter of obscene hate propaganda like Jürgen Graf cringes at reading the word "shit", go figure. Doesn't your hypocrisy jump at you, Jürgen?

So what's it's going to be now, are you going to remove the "threw the towel" lie, or do you want me to publish the present exchange as well?

It's up to you, my friend.

Roberto

I gave Jürgen a three-hour deadline to remove the "threw the towel" BS, which he allowed to expire.

Mr Graf demands a "detailled refutation" of his books. Why in the world should it have to be "detailled"? -One merely needs to remind the Durchgangslagerists of what Dr. Dr. Otto Rasch explained with reg. to Durchgangslager Soldau. The term Durchgangslager, he said, was used "eigens zu dem Zweck,die notwendig werdenden Liquidationen unauffällig zu machen". (Source: Krausnick & Wilhelm, Die Truppe...,Stuttgart 1981, p.94)-Faurisson, in his Ecrits révisionnistes I-IV, never mentions Dr. Rasch.Too bad, could have saved us from a basic misconception and pointless details.